Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
The socratic method CBT
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
In the Phaedo Socrates claims that the soul is indeed immortal, that it lives forever and cannot die even after the body has died, thus philosophers spend their lives devaluing themselves from their body. Socrates presents the Theory of Recollection to persuade his fellow philosophers that have convened inside his cell that the soul is immortal. In essence, the recollection argument refers to the act of learning, because the soul is immortal, according to Socrates, then this suggests that when a person is learning something they are actually relearning it, because their soul has existed before they were born. This idea of recollecting knowledge is prominent and is the most convincing argument in proving the existence of immortality through the soul, however, this argument does not suggest that the soul continues to exist after death and lacks clarity regarding what truly happens after a person dies. Socrates uses the word “recollection” extensively in the Phaedo dialogue, by this he is asserting that learning is simply recollecting knowledge. Socrates explains to Cebes, one of the philosophers present in the cell that day, that according to the theory, “we must at …show more content…
The most obvious problem with the recollection argument is that while it does offer plausible points about why the soul is immortal it only really discusses that the soul must have lived before. Nevertheless, it fails to offer a valid point regarding what happens after death, how does the soul live on after? Moreover, this argument is similar to the Cyclical Argument, which suggests that everything that can change must have come from its opposite, this is Socrates’s initially argument. Yet, much like cyclical argument, the recollection argument is a circular argument which really does not go
...ox could be proved wrong then he has demonstrated his point very well. This would mean accepting the `minimal sense' of the recollection theory - as Vlastos puts is, that demonstrative knowledge is independent of sense-experience, thus establishing that there can be non-empirical knowledge, but not that all knowledge is non-empirical. However, if in his demonstration, Socrates meant to show that Meno's paradox is completely wrong, and that the recollection theory applies to all forms of knowledge i.e. that all knowledge is non-empirical, which is the `full-strength' doctrine, then he was wrong. Thus we must conclude that the recollection theory is an answer to Meno's paradox, but by no means solves it entirely. Irwin writes that `to resolve Meno's paradox Socrates need only suggest that one have an initial belief about the object of inquiry rather than knowledge.'
The 'doctrine of recollection' states that all true knowledge exists implicitly within us, and can be brought to consciousness - made explicit - by recollection. Using the Platonic concepts of 'Forms', 'particulars', 'knowledge' and 'true opinion', this essay explains what can or cannot be recollected, why all knowledge is based on recollection, and why the doctrine does not prove the soul to be immortal.
The main theme behind the "Phaedo" is Socrates' readiness and willingness to die, because of his belief of immortality. Socrates believed that when his body ceased to exist anymore, that his soul would leave and join that of the forms, where he would be eternally. Socrates believed so strongly in this, that not only did he not fear his death, he welcomed it. He believed that only when the soul separated from the body, is a person able to be truly enlightened and gain all knowledge. This "enlightenment" has been Socrates' life long goal of discovering the truth. Even at his hour of death, Socrates showed no hesitation. However, Socrates' friends did not believe so strongly, and took some great convincing by Socrates, to allow his friends to be okay with his death. The two proofs that Socrates used to convince his friends are the "Doctrine of Opposites" and the "simple and composite theory.
Remembrance is an integral part of our everyday lives. Both pleasant and unpleasant memories shape who we are as human beings. The definition of memory is two fold 1. “the faculty by which the mind stores and remembers information” and 2. “Something remembered from the past; a recollection” (Google Definition). The life of memory has three stages in which it is created. An event occurs in ones life it becomes encoded and stored in the brain. Following the encoding, the brain then has full access to retrieve the memory in a response to any current activity or thought. Memories are unique to each person. There are three main types of memories that are studied. An individual memory is one that is formed by his or her personal experiences. An institutional
It has seen many things including all the forms and the knowledge of them all. We cannot search for what we do not know but we can search for what we have forgotten. Socrates’s theory of recollection has two problems. The first one is that the theory repeats itself without giving a conclusion. We do not know what virtue is, however, we can recollect it because our souls have knowledge about it.
Plato argues for the immortality of the soul in the Phaedo. He provides 3 arguments for his theory, the arguments from opposites, recollection, and affinity. Each argument proposes an intriguing account for his claim that the soul must exist past death. His evidence and proposal for each account leave no room for counterarguments. Fellow philosophers like Simmias and Cebes provide two different counters for Plato’s claim, however he accurately disproves them by using his 3 arguments as rebuttal. Plato’s three arguments for the proving of the immortality and longevity of a soul provide clear and concise reasons to agree with his approach.
As I have been reading memoirs about memory for this class, each essay made me recall or even examine my past memory closely. However, the more minutely I tried to recall what happened in the past, the more confused I got because I could not see the clear image and believe I get lost in my own memory, which I thought, I have preserved perfectly in my brain. The loss of the details in each memory has made me a little bit sentimental, feeling like losing something important in my life. But, upon reading those essays, I came to realize that remembering correct the past is not as important as growing up within memory. However, the feelings that were acquired from the past experience tend to linger distinctly. The essay that is related to my experience
What is memory and how its work. It is usually link with the ‘thinking of again’ or ‘recalling to the mind’ of a thing learned or memorized before. Definitions of this sort imply conscious awareness in the remembered that they are recollecting something of the past. For instance, we may remember our first day of school or some information like who is the president of the country. Basically, this is just tiny part of our capacity when we check out the full human memory capabilities.
Learning and memory are two topics that have held the attention of researchers for centuries. This is most likely due to the fact that they are integral to our survival, yet are unconscious processes that we take for granted every day.
To demonstrate Socrates’ theory, a slave boy was brought in. Knowing that this slave boy never had any training in geometry, Socrates asks him a geometric problem. In answering every questions Socrates asked, the slave boy eventually reached the correct answer. Above all, Socrates emphasized that he never taught the slave boy anything during the entire process. He only asked questions that led the slave boy to his own “recollection” of the topic discussed. Because the boy gave the correct answer at the end, Socrates was convinced of his theory of recollection.
First and foremost, Socrates believed that when a person dies the body is what seems to die while the soul continues to live and exist. Although many suggested that when the body dies the soul dies with it, Socrates provides numerous arguments to prove his point otherwise. The arguments that were presented consisted of The argument of Reincarnation, The argument of Opposites, The argument of Recollection, and The argument of Forms. The argument that was most convincing for me was that of the Argument of Forms because Socrates makes his most compelling arguments here and it’s the most effective. On the other hand, the argument that I saw to be the least convincing was that of the Argument of Recollection and Reincarnation because both arguments fail to fully support the idea of the soul being immortal.
hilosophers have contemplated over the subject of immortality. They question if the soul, particularly, is immortal. Although Plato writes the Meno, it is supposed to be a copy of what Socrates personally encountered and “taught” in his lifetime. Even though the Meno is originally about the search for the meaning of virtue, one perspective on the immortality of the soul is introduced to us by Socrates in that play. Therefore, what Socrates thought about the immortality of the soul in the Meno is the following: “If the truth about reality is always in our soul, the soul would be immortal so that you should always confidently try to seek out and recollect what you do not know at present” (Plato, 86b) In the beginning, Meno challenges Socrates
For a man not to fear death, not even the slightest bit is a remarkable feat. However when examining the life of Socrates, his daily life involved the preparation for his own death. Through his daily philosophical debates, Socrates engaged in conversations which forced him to examine his life. After all as Socrates states himself in the Apology, “the unexamined life is not worth living” (38a).
In Plato’s dialogue, the Phaedo, Socrates gives an account of the immortality of the soul. Socrates does this through a series of arguments. He argues that the soul will continue to exist, and that it will go on to a better place. The argument begins on the day of his execution with the question of whether it is good or bad to die. In other words, he is arguing that the soul is immortal and indestructible. This argument is contrary to Cebes and Simmias who argue that even the soul is long lasting, it is not immortal and it is destroyed when the body dies. This paper focuses on Socrates 's first argument for immortality of the human soul, his counter arguments to Cebes and Simmias ' arguments, and an explanation as to why Socrates first argument for the immorality of the soul does not succeed in establishing that the soul is immortal.
Plato believed that the body and the soul were two separate entities, the body being mortal and the soul being immortal. In Plato’s phaedo, this is further explained by Socrates. He claims that by living a philosophical life, we are able to eventually free the soul from the body and its needs. If we have not yield to our bodily needs, we should not fear death, since it can than permanently detach the soul from the body. The most convincing argument for the immortality of the body is the theory of recollection, which shows that we are already born with knowledge of forms and that learning is thus recalling these ideas. If we are already born with knowledge this implies that are soul is immortal, since it would otherwise be a blank page.